Primary competition can help the Dems....The slugfest with Trump will get really monotonous

[Armstead]

Bernie is offering a contest of ideas. If Democrats were smart they'd embrace that, and allow it to be aired and used to hone and broaden its message.

Regardless of which candidate wins, the slugfest with Trump will go on for months. It's already started. It's going to get real monotonous....and I suspect the longer Trump v. Clinton (or Bernie) goes on, the more tuned out voters will get by the relentless negativity.

So instead of beating up on Sanders and those who support him, and trying to stifle a lively debate over issues, why not allow the primary to play out? Take advantage of it.

There's plenty of time for the "Trump is a bad man" back and forth.

[LisaM]

1. I thought it was great that the Dems stretched it out last time.

When Hillary and Barack Obama stepped out on the stage together eight years ago for their final debate and I realized that the Democratic voters had seriously offered us a choice between a woman and a PoC - and that that candidate would likely win the election - it brought a lump to my throat.

Luckily, the debate was very civil and it was clear that party dis-unification was not on the table. I truly hope that the end of this primary season brings the same message.

Now that the eyes of the voting public are all on us, it is especially important to stress our similarities and to focus on our shared opponents. It's absolutely critical.

We need to be especially wary of divide and conquer tactics on social media. Given the number of links people post here from places like Judicial Watch and its ilk, I'd ask all DUers to be on the lookout for the Rovians. I notice sometimes when a heated debate dies down, someone jumps in and pokes it back up. This is pure Rove. We need to put ourselves above these tactics and focus on the main goal.

[DLCWIdem]

2. somewhat agree

Its the negative attacks. Like yesterday on the day of the primary Bernie comes out with the money laundering attack. And everyone knows the polls for the general means squat, but its his insistance that he going to use supers to overturn the will of the voters and since she has more women and minorities it is particularly irking, because guess who has been disenfranchised in the past? African Americans and Women. Even moveon.org was against this idea. She will clearly have a plurality of the delegates even if she doesn't have the majority and she is on track for getting the majority according to Nate Silver. She might be a little short but it would probably less than 100. Even the repugs said if Trump had the most delegates and not the 1237 he should be the nominee. He is trying to damage her lower her polls then use polls to show that he would do better. If it was a genuine airing of ideas for the platform then yes it would be energenic for the democrats. But his insistence on using supers damages her, and it also damages him, making him less than credible, whips up his supporters and makes everything more toxic.

[LisaM]

3. I agree with you there.

I am not opposed to the vigorous debate suggested in the OP. The smear tactics, eh.

[w4rma]

15. Smear attack was from Hillary attacking Bernie for "not funding Democrats", Hillary's $ laundering

explodes Hillary's lie about Bernie. Her supporters just don't like hearing that their "queen" lied again, so they stick their fingers in their ears, instead.

[DLCWIdem]

16. nice try. the accusation was just made recently. Weaver said he was just repeating....

[w4rma]

19. I knew that she was doing something shady with her "joint DNC funding", but now I understand it.

Hillary raised huge donations from wealthy individuals and bundlers, but that money couldn't be used to attack Sanders with, so to do that she had to launder it through the DNC. The DNC would spend the money she raised on fundraising ads for Clinton all over the nation, and those ads would result in a smaller amount than what she raised from the big donors, but she could use that smaller return of money to directly attack Sanders with.

And that's not even the whole of it:

She pretended that the money that she passed through the DNC was FOR the DNC and then attacked Sanders for not passing any money through the DNC, like she SUPPOSED to be doing, but wasn't doing. Hillary is a despicable con-artist.

[LisaM]

20. The funding is completely above board, and the methodology is public record

Last edited Thu May 5, 2016, 11:14 PM - Edit history (1)

It hasn't all been distributed yet. I'm not going to do your work for you, but you can easily check out the formula. This is one of the saddest accusations I've run across and the Sanders team should be ashamed of itself. I notice that they dropped their scurrilous lawsuit against the DNC recently, BTW. This phony "money laundering" accusation doesn't even rise to the level of being able to bring any kind of a lawsuit (because it's bogus, and Sanders signed the same agreement anyway). They just sent out a very accusatory letter and then used it as an occasion to fundraise.

Hope you didn't send any money based on those smears!

[w4rma]

30. Sanders has no use for a "joint fundraising agreement" with the sole purpose of laundering large

donations through the DNC to return a smaller amount of funding in small donations.

[LisaM]

31. Well he signed one.

I will agree he probably doesn't have much interest in raising money for anyone else.

[w4rma]

32. There's that fucking smear I just finished talking about. The agreement has NOTHING to do with

raising funds for down ticket Democrats or for state parties. It has *everything* to do with funneling large donations through the DNC to return back small donations.

The funds raised, by Clinton, down ticket, or for state parties, or even for the national party were less than 1% of what she funneled through the DNC. A token amount, and no more.

[thucythucy]

27. Excellent post.

I was rather miffed, in 2008, when Hillary took as long as she did to bow out, but in the end I saw that it benefited both (then) Senator Obama and the party in general. The length of the contest also made Hillary's gesture at the convention--being the one to cast the votes that put Obama over the top--more dramatic.

"It is especially important to stress our similarities and to focus on our shared opponents." Exactly.

[NurseJackie]

4. Because Bernie's accusations that Hillary is "unqualified" and the Dems are "corrupt" ...

... (unless they've previously endorsed Bernie) ... and making accusations of "money laundering" crimes will certainly help with our competitive edge over the GOP? Is that what you're saying?

He helps nothing. It's all about his ego, vanity and pride.

and trying to stifle a lively debate over issues,

Oooo ... "Lively debate". Over "issues". How quaint!

[Armstead]

5. I'll give you that it should not get personal -- except it works both ways

But also if you want to talk about ego, vanity and pride, how about someone who has been prepping to be president for 40 years, and who, with her spouse, wants to make the WH a family business enterprise?

[NurseJackie]

6. I'd call it dedication to public service.

Characterizing it as a "family business enterprise" is hyperbolic. It's untrue, it's intended to inflame, and accomplishes nothing from someone who (presumably) is interested in "lively debate over issues".

I like you Armstead, you seem to be sincere and passionate, but sometimes it's hard for me to keep up with you when you're all over the map like that.

[Armstead]

7. I was responding in kind

If you hadn't mentioned that little dig about ego vanity and pride, I would have said i agree with you that it should not be on such a personal plane between them.

[DLCWIdem]

17. never mind

I actually thought that from your post above that you might have an open mind but i see that it is closed. I say your poste in another thread when i was writing about Sierra Blanca. For your information, the article came from several different sources. When ever i read something i actually check it out. The information came from daily kos and I also checked on c span to read about Wellstones speech. And the article in the Texas newspaper. You may think every single article tthat does not bow to bernie is wrong, but others will actually find out.

[Armstead]

18. That was a while back and I don't remember it...

So I don't recall what i might have said that implies a closed mind.

yeah I'm very much a Bernie partisan. Have been for 20 years. But I don't think he walks on water.

As far as Sierra Blanca goes, having nuclear waste to dispose of is a crappy situation. There is no good solution. All one can hope to find is a least bad one -- and disposing and storing nuclear waste in the watershed that feeds into New York, Boston and many otehr population centers with millions of people is not the least bad solution.

[DLCWIdem]

21. another nice try. When Sanders supporters say something is "propaganda" and they know its true

Last edited Thu May 5, 2016, 04:23 PM - Edit history (2)

I am very new to this forum so the post I am talking about occurred within a day or so from this one, not a while back. Your response in that thread was oh that information was from that author; so its propaganda. By the sound of your post above you already knew about Sierra Blanca so it was disingenuous of you to imply that it was propoganda. The implication being that it didn't happen. I can have a serious discussion of the issue that yes there isn't really a good decision about where to dump nuclear waste and compromise may be the best of a bad situation. A compromise that Sanders seldom makes for other things like the amber alert, etc...
The point of the Sierra Blanca, (now that we agree that it does exist,) however, is that the waste was dumped in a poor hispanic community, who couldn't fight it because they were poor. The essence of Wellstone's arguement of environmental racism. The thread that i am referring to was about general election electability. My post was about the idea that Sanders brand, the crusader for the poor against the rich, could be adversly effected in a general election because Sierra Blanca hits at the underpinnings of that brand. Hence the subject of that thread about not being vetted. Most people do not know about Sierra Blanca. What the dailykos article also underscores or shows is an indifference to that poor community. An indifference that was contrasted with Paul Wellstones concern for the community. I showed that dailykos article to a Bernie supporter and she said she was quite surprised. She didn't think it sounded like how she thought he was and was looking at Sanders in a different way. My further point in that other thread was that the Donald who does take things over the top would use that by saying to the hispanic community something like see I just want to deport you, you can come back legally but (he) Sanders will dump nuclear waste and poison your children. This could have the effect of leveling the Hispanic vote. A group which Nate Silver is saying will help us win. The Hispanic vote is going overwhelmingly in the democrats favor right now.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Except no nuclear waste was ever sent to Sierra Blanca. You claim that it was. It wasn't.

On the other hand, Sierra Blanca was the site of the largest sewage dump in the country, New York City sent sludge by the trainload to Sierra Blanca for years and years.
The fact that you do not know this, and that you claim nuclear waste was dumped there indicates your interest is entirely exploitative and situational, that you could not find the place on a map.

New York's Sewage Was a Texas Town's Gold
SIERRA BLANCA, Tex.— There is not much here anymore, if there was ever much of anything to begin with. The town's main street is coated in dust, and the old movie house is long shuttered. The one sign of activity -- the traffic moving along elevated Interstate 10 -- is a reminder that the modern world rarely stops here.

The other reminder can be found on the outskirts of this tiny town, where freight cars are being unloaded for the last time. The last sludge train from New York City arrived this month, leaving its last shipment of what officials describe as ''bio-solids'' but what others call treated sewage.

The dump in Sierra Blanca, one of the biggest sludge dumps in the world, is going out of business.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/us/new-york-s-sewage-was-a-texas-town-s-gold.html

Here is more information, this one has photos:

Sierra Blanca, the Nation's Largest Sewage Dump
http://www.txpeer.org/toxictour/merco.html

And remember, this sewage dumping actually happened. For years and years.

[DLCWIdem]

33. Sierra Blanca

Perhaps I did not make myself clear in the post.
http://www.umich.edu/--snre492
Yes, Sierra Blanca managed to win the fight of the dumping of the waste , it was a uphill battle with no help from Sanders who was acttively fighting to dump the waste. The fact is as of the above article that compact is still in place (between the three states) which lets them dump in another poor place. Furthermore, Sanders Did actively strip out Wellstone's protections from that amendment. AND yes, I know that Sierra Blanca was already host to Marco Joint Venture. Which is the point I am trying to get at in my post. Sander's INdifference to the people as compared to Wellstone's Concern. To put it bluntly "oh they are already living in garbage lets heap some more on them" mentality. Which is a far cry from Sanders' crusader for the poor image that he is trying to project now. Incidentlly, there were alot more reasons to not use the sight for a nuclear dump in the above article. Ie an earthquake site and being on a aquafor being some main reasons.

[DLCWIdem]

34. esssentially he has co-opted Wellstone's image for himself but he was actively fighting Wellstone.

[DLCWIdem]

11. business enterprises

Ask yourself if you would feel that way if Caroline Kennedy or any of the Kennedys were to run for office. There are many families drawn into public service but that does not make them "evil". If you find that it is just Hilliary that rubs you wrong than maybe you should question yourself. And make no doubt about she will be her own candidate not her husband.

[Armstead]

14. She has already said her husband will be a top advisor

And she wouldn't be sending him all over the country if she wanted to establish a separate identity for herself.

And I have no problem with wealthy people wanting to go into public service.

I do have a problem with the interconnected web ofcorporate/Wall St. money and power hat the Clintons have built and profit to that degree from.

[DLCWIdem]

8. issue amber alert

While we are debating issues. Can you seriously tell me why Sanders would not be for the amber alert system. What possible civil liberties could trump our need to keep our children safe?

[Bluenorthwest]

26. Also voting no along with Bernie- John Lewis, Elijah Cummings, Jesse Jackson, Barney Frank

Maxine Waters, Bobby Scott, Barbara Lee.....why do you think they voted no on that bill? Why do you carry on as if Bernie Sanders was the only No vote? Had you ever heard of his legislation prior to today when you were told to hang it on Bernie and try to not mention John Lewis and all that?

[DLCWIdem]

28. yes and rand paul and others. still not answered

I understand that your reply is to link Sanders to the black caucaus' votes who may well have had their own reasons for voting against the alert such as thinking it may unfairly target AA. I do not know the reason that they voted no. My question was about Sanders, who when questiioned, mentioned civil liberties as why he voted against the bill. So i'll ask again what civil liberties...

[Bluenorthwest]

29. Rand Paul was not elected until 2011 this legisltation we are discussing is from 2003

I made my points using actual facts. You continue to make things up, such as 'Rand Paul'. You should answer the questions put to you. Why do you try to obscure the facts of that vote and make it seem sinister and all Bernie's doing? What's the motive behind that? Clearly you don't know the issue at all, nor who voted on it so what is driving you here?

[DLCWIdem]

35. amber alert answer the question

Maybe it was a later amber alert that was voted against. But Rand Paul aside . I am not trying to hang some sexual predator wrap on Sanders. There was a youtube video in which Sanders stated he thought there were provisions in the bill which were unconstitutional. As far as I know Sanders is not a lawyer, and i am willing to bet there wasn't any shortage of lawyers in the congress when the bill passed and they did not have any problems with the bill. Sometimes civil libertarians take things too far. So i will state the question again what civil liberties are trumping safety? I am just asking for Sanders reasons....

[Hav]

9. Good point

I think the bitterness we see on DU or the internet in general doesn't reflect how the majority of the Democrats feel. I believe that most would be fine with either of the two Democrats. The long primaries in 2008 were later seen as beneficial as it helped build the infrastructure in the later states.
An exchange between Clinton and Sanders is certainly preferable to anything involving Trump.
But both could also start to define Trump early as well as this thread shows:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511900995

[DLCWIdem]

10. a serious disscussion on the issues

Alot of the Betnie progressive talk about social democracy and how he likes to compare Bernies policies to the new deal. I believe they have a serious misunderstanding of progressive policies and new deal policies. The progressive movement in the early 1900's was a 2 tieted policy approach. There were alot of women progressives at the time dealing with children in the factories and the poor on the street. There was FDR who was dealing with the depression. Thats the first tier. When the entitlement programs were started the highest level Social Security was dealt with on the federal level. It was linked to jobs, as we all know, there was a perception that Social Security was earned. When you think of it what you pay into social security for retirement, unemployment etc.. is less than what you get out of it but it is still considered earned. The second tier was state level which funds programs such as AFDC and foodstamps. Can you guess which programs have stood the test of time and is held in higher esteem. Social Security has become the third rail while state programs have been denigrated as "welfare queens".

[DLCWIdem]

12. i hope the bitterness here is not reflected in the general populace.

Intetestingly it is said when people meet Hiliary they find her warm and caring. There is a article that came out before New York voted of a young millenial on her hometown who was voting for her.... Hiliary had worked on child care so she could go to college. I wish I could remember the name of the article.

[pat_k]

13. Great point.

Ultimately, it could boil down to turnout. And people who get "sick of it all" won't be running to the polls in droves.

[DLCWIdem]

22. tRump is a great motivator to get to the polls

[pat_k]

24. And we need to do what we can to make sure they get there.

I don't like speculating on the worst coming to pass, but we can't underestimate Trump. If people believe he has no shot, they're not less motivated to get out to stop him.

Sanders staying in is a good thing. In addition to shortening the painful spectacle of the Clinton/Trump slug fest, it may keep Clinton from "pivoting right." The widely believed fallacy that it's necessary to go even further right to win in a general election is so misguided. When it comes to fighting for the core principles of the Democratic Party, the "strategy" of preemptive surrender is a demoralizing demonstration of weakness. It's time to demonstrate strength by fighting for what's right, win or lose. That's how you win.

[pat_k]

23. delete

Responded to wrong post.